2022 PLC(CS) 375 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIR

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

KAMRAN ALI, SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FIA, LAHORE VS ABDUL QUDOOS, SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ASSISTANT INSPECTOR GENERAL POLICE CRIMES BRANCH, MUZAFFARABAD Interpretation of law and elucidation of facts would not be deemed to be wrong simply for the reason that a view contrary to it could also be taken or it was possible to be taken. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 PLC(CS) 375 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRBookmark this Case KAMRAN ALI, SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FIA, LAHORE VS ABDUL QUDOOS, SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ASSISTANT INSPECTOR GENERAL POLICE CRIMES BRANCH, MUZAFFARABAD Review is not permissible on the ground that a party interprets the law in a different manner or a party is not satisfied from the judgment of the Court or a different view is possible. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 PLC(CS) 375 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRBookmark this Case KAMRAN ALI, SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FIA, LAHORE VS ABDUL QUDOOS, SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ASSISTANT INSPECTOR GENERAL POLICE CRIMES BRANCH, MUZAFFARABAD R.8---azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution act (VIII of 1974), art. 42-a---Review of Supreme Court Judgment---Scope---Case of petitioners was that the proviso to R.8(1)(b) of the azad Jammu and Kashmir Civil Servants (appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1977, provided that if the date of continuous appointment in the case of two or more persons appointed to the grade was the same, the older, if not junior to the younger in the next below grade, shall rank senior to the younger person---according to petitioners, the word "grade" had been used and not the "cadre", hence, Supreme Court had erred while recording findings---Validity---Petitioners were not allowed to argue the case like an appeal in the review petition---In the next below rank the seniority of the contesting parties were not common, hence, the question of seniority in the next below grade did not arise---Supreme Court after detailed discussion held that the criteria provided in R. 8 that in case of continuous appointment of two or more persons in the same grade the older shall rank senior to the younger---No error or mistake apparent on the fact of record was pointed out by the parties---Review petition was dismissed. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 PLC(CS) 375 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRBookmark this Case KAMRAN ALI, SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FIA, LAHORE VS ABDUL QUDOOS, SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ASSISTANT INSPECTOR GENERAL POLICE CRIMES BRANCH, MUZAFFARABAD art. 42-a---azad Jammu and Kashmir Supreme Court (Powers of Review) act, 1980, S.2---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XLVII, R. 1---Review---Scope---Supreme Court may review its judgment or order in a civil review petition on grounds akin to the grounds as mentioned in O.XLVII, R.1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and in a criminal review petition on the ground of an error apparent on the face of the record. Head NotesCase Description

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 PLC